The right-wing group the Proud Boys would have killed former US vice-president Mike Pence had they been presented with a chance on the day of the riots at the US Capitol on January 6th last year, a congressional committee has heard.
The committee said on Thursday that at one stage there was a distance of only 40ft between Mr Pence and “the mob”.
Committee member Pete Aguilar said, “make no mistake”, the vice-president’s life was in danger as supporters of then president Donald Trump broke in to the US Capitol. Many were angry over Mr Pence’s refusal to block the certification of the victory of Joe Biden in the presidential election.
Mr Aguilar said a confidential witness had recently told investigators that members of the Proud Boys would have killed Mr Pence and others, including the speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, if they had had the opportunity.
Mr Aguilar said the crowds surrounding the US Capitol had surged after Mr Trump tweeted at 2.24pm that Mr Pence had not had the courage to do what should have been done (in relation to the certification of the presidential vote).
Mr Pence’s counsel Greg Jacob told the hearing that the former vice-president refused to leave the US Capitol as it was attacked by the rioters on January 6th as his Secret Service detail had wanted. He said Mr Pence was determined to see through his constitutional duties on the day.
“He didn’t want to take any chance that the world would see the vice-president of the United States fleeing the United States Capitol.”
Mr Jacob said Mr Trump had never called Mr Pence to check on his safety. He said Mr Pence and his wife reacted “with frustration”.
The committee also heard of a “heated conversation” between Mr Trump and Mr Pence on the morning of January 6th when the vice-president made clear he would not be objecting to the election results. Aides who overheard the conversation said Mr Trump had called the vice-president “a wimp”.
Mr Trump’s daughter Ivanka told the committee in recorded testimony that the conversation between her father and Mr Pence over the certification of the election results had been “pretty heated”.
Separately, a former federal judge told the congressional committee that if Mr Pence had declared Mr Trump to be the next president even though he had lost the election in 2020, it would have plunged US into a revolution and a constitutional crisis.
Judge Michael Luttig said there was no provision in the US constitution or in the country’s laws to allow a vice-president to count alternative electors (to determine the winner of the presidential election) from the various states other than those officially certified by a designated state official.
January 6th Committee: did Trump attempt a coup?
After 11 months, nearly 100 subpoenas and more than a thousand interviews, the congressional committee investigating the January 6th attack on the US Capitol has begun holding a series of public hearings to present its findings. The key question for the committee is whether the violence seen on the day was just a spontaneous outpouring of anger and frustration by supporters of a defeated candidate, or whether there was an orchestrated attempt to frustrate the transfer of power following a legitimate election.In other words, was there an attempted coup?The Irish Times Washington Correspondent Martin Wall reports.
A conservative lawyer, John Eastman, who was advising Mr Trump, had put forward a theory that Mr Pence had the authority to reject electors sent by the various states and effectively decide the result of the presidential election.
Mr Luttig maintained there was no legal, constitutional or historical precedent that would have allowed the former vice-president to do so.
Mr Luttig advised Mr Pence in advance of the joint session of Congress on January 6th.
He told the select committee of the US House of Representatives on Thursday that had the vice-president obeyed “the orders” from Mr Trump during the certification of the electoral college, it would have “plunged United States into what I believe would have been tantamount to a revolution within a constitutional crisis in United States”.
Mr Jacob said that Mr Eastman had acknowledged in a private conversation that his theory was likely to be rejected unanimously if it was considered by the US Supreme Court.
The committee maintained that Mr Eastman had subsequently inquired about securing a presidential pardon.
